Re: What do you do with an Apple //?

[spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector)]

In article pubpc1@library.ucla.edu writes...

>By the way, after getting the chance
>to use a PowerPC based MacOS clone, I have to say that the engineering
>is superior to that of PC clones.  Umax has an excellent line of MacOS
>clones that have blazing fast PowerPC processors, PCI slots that you
>can plug in standard cards to, and even a parallel port that accepts
>standard PC parallel port peripherals.  And Mitch, you gotta see it
>run Virtual PC (an emulated Pentium MMX processor).  Increadible
>performance and, after you load Windows 95 into it, the Umax can do
>anything PC clones can.  You can even plug in your PCI sound card and
>use it with PC software under Virtual PC.  Some models even have both
>IDE and SCSI built in.

    The ironic bit about this is, all your driving interest and
excitement in this machine stem from the fact it is PC compatible.
As for myself though, I would see the "Macintosh" side as extra
baggage that is unneccessarily stuck to a PC clone. I rather pay
less and just get the real thing (and if I really wanted/needed
to run Macintosh software, I would use a software emulator).
Furthermore, I would be able to continually upgrade without
having to depend on a single clone maker (the Mac clone market
is getting a little too small for comfort with recent events).

    Incidentally, both my PC sound cards are ISA slot based boards, 
the only PCI board I'm currently using is for video.  

>You don't have to support the fruity logo to use a PowerPC machine.

    The reason for my dislike of the Mac has little to do with who
manufactures it (certainly, I do dislike Apple Computer, I make no
secret about that, but if they made a solid product that interested
me, I would probably buy it. Unfortunately, it's been almost exactly
11 years since they've made anything that interests me). Any of the
reservations I have about the machine come from limitation in its
hardware and software that makes it what it is. I won't go further
than that since I don't want to start another debate. :)

>Well, of course on a _fast_ (compared to a 486/25) system like
>yours, PC software is going to look good.  No one is debating that.

    My Am5x86-133 is not really that fast, unless we compare it
directly with your laptop (which does not equal the average PC
system out there, which was originally my point). Compared to
most systems out there, my PC is fairly slow actually.

>AppleWorks GS hardly ever crashes on me, btw.

    Well I've used AppleWorks GS on three completely different
machines, it has froze up consistantly on all three systems
when using it's word-processor module. The program has not been
touched since 1989, and even back then it was badly in need of
an update. I had a renewed interest in AWGS when SQC promised
to do a major rewrite, but when that fell through so did all
my hope for that piece of software.

Mitchell Spector
spec@vax2.concordia.ca